Btl Scum Regrouping And On The Offensive. -- Merged

[spyguy]

I hope someone, soon, will write up the detail of the finances of the UK banks that went under.

Id love to read about the B+B accounts and losses.

The Scarborugh BS is closest to me. I spent my childhood going by its original HQ.

A search on the local papers website makes interesting reading.

http://www.thescarboroughnews.co.uk/search?query="Scarborough+building+society"&sortBy=Date&pageNumber=3&navigationFlag=true

It starts will a Back to future article, giving you an idea how little control there was:

www.thescarboroughnews.co.uk/news/former-finance-boss-faces-24-charges-1-1410870

Comedy one:

http://www.thescarboroughnews.co.uk/news/financial-lesson-is-a-game-for-students-1-1390294

 

 

 

[iamnumerate]

1 hour ago, Venger said:

Why amazing?

Do you know how many BTL (type/style) mortgages were around before 1997?    One source I have somewhere suggests surprisingly few - but I haven't got time to search for it.

 

BTL growth and messing around rearranging the organs of the financial system, all came under Labour doing as far as I am concerned, pushing the fever of foreverHPI and speculation and how much it's gone up by again this year.

2002:  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/inside_money/2183124.stm

88 might have seen deregulation, but not massive BTLing.   No More Boom and Bust took control in 1997 and then it all took off, getting ever worse until financial system creaked at risk of collapse.   

Hopefully the recent crazy double down BTL, just been putting risk on those market participants who can take the coming hit.  Their own houses at risk.  As many of us have held out for.

Well I meant amazing if you think what the Labour party was set up for.  It is bit like if in 30 years time UKIP were campaigning for us to rejoining the EU.

[Super Saints]

Long term renter here - approaching ten years.

Evicted by landlord Nov 16 as he wanted to sell. Seeing a few more properties coming on the market that look like landlords selling up.

I'm not sure what effect this will have on prices (I'm in the northwest) but the increased supply and the expected lower level of competition from BTL landlords leave me hopeful of buying in next few years.

 

 

[zugzwang]

26 minutes ago, iamnumerate said:

Well I meant amazing if you think what the Labour party was set up for.  It is bit like if in 30 years time UKIP were campaigning for us to rejoining the EU.

The Labour Party was turned by market fundamentalism in the mid-90s, just as the Conservative Party had been in the mid-70s. By the fantastic (and scientifically illiterate) notion that markets are optimising and self-correcting when free from govt intervention.

As for responsibility, clearly the crisis was worldwide in scope and Brown was just one actor among many.

Interest only mortgages were the UK's subprime, rising from 13% of the market in 2002 to 33% in 2007. The FSA mortgage market review in 2009 found that the 'vast majority [of i.o. mortgagors] had no repayment vehicle specified.'

Ponzi actors, plain and simple, relying on capital appreciation to clear their borrowing.

 

[Ah-so]

8 hours ago, Super Saints said:

Long term renter here - approaching ten years.

Evicted by landlord Nov 16 as he wanted to sell. Seeing a few more properties coming on the market that look like landlords selling up.

I'm not sure what effect this will have on prices (I'm in the northwest) but the increased supply and the expected lower level of competition from BTL landlords leave me hopeful of buying in next few years.

 

 

You should be a poster child for Property 118 - a tenant made homeless by a landlord selling up. And you can't afford to buy (yet).

Has Busta contacted you? 

[Venger]

18 hours ago, zugzwang said:

The Labour Party was turned by market fundamentalism in the mid-90s, just as the Conservative Party had been in the mid-70s. By the fantastic (and scientifically illiterate) notion that markets are optimising and self-correcting when free from govt intervention.

As for responsibility, clearly the crisis was worldwide in scope and Brown was just one actor among many.

Interest only mortgages were the UK's subprime, rising from 13% of the market in 2002 to 33% in 2007. The FSA mortgage market review in 2009 found that the 'vast majority [of i.o. mortgagors] had no repayment vehicle specified.'

Ponzi actors, plain and simple, relying on capital appreciation to clear their borrowing.

 

Of course, 'sweet innocence'.  Gordon didn't half play it up though, and take all the boom-time plaudits.  

What else?  Winter fuel payment.  (which is now treated as a right older people 'worked for')... I just can't bring myself to think about the full list of voting-kickbacks.   Financial tripartite.  Can always help by spending more - taxpayers money - never runs out.  Redistribution to the BTLers and other lessor productive market participants.   

I have previously posted my news sources where Conservatives tried to push back against it on a few occasions, early and mid 2000s.  Hague and Howard - with Howard basically warning it seems only a hard-crash can change opinions, against the free-spending glory.  

A Labour nonsense answer is always 'Conservatives would have done just the same' - so why did Hague want to spend less, and Howard not happy with all Labour's spending pledges?   Why did Conservatives not just boom-boom-boom deficit spend out of the 90s?  

Why endure those tough times to get back to balance?  And they pushed back against Labour during the first 5-6 years.  Someone needs to prove to me that Conservatives (as a party - not some fringe Con MP).  The regulation involved was talking about was red-tape trading regulation - unless it was towards 2007... perhaps when the Metropolitan Cons had come into power, also a bit heady from HPI and Labour's miracle.  

Quote

post-date 2010.

Absolutely right. Why are people earning well in excess of £50,000 a year able to claim family tax credit??? 

So that more people feel beholden to the State for their income.

Thatcher's failure was that she never broke that mindset despite never standing on a platform of buying millions of votes by increasing spending. Every election since has been won by the party prepared to offer the most outlandish promises.

There was a very good article in the FT a few days ago saying that in the past 2 weeks alone, Labour MPs had promised to spend £7,000,000,000 on community projects. The politics of the UK are such that the Tories can't stand on a platform that says, "We'll not build a new village hall" (or whatever).

 

Well Conservatives didn't try to compete on village halls in 2010 and Labour with money for everything.  Thatcher tried to break it.  Not a failure.  A tough job to do that.

She, nor Major, can't take the blame for another political party standing (PR savvier - beards off... no wearing standard white shirts on television but off-white to give improved complexion on screen), promotions going to their new 'Spin Doctors' - and coming in on platform of 'things only get better' and then ever more promises to let the spending and good times flow.  

Then offering ever more and more spending and good times

 Wanting to win elections and be adored and enjoy power - especially with many VI who stand to gain from such good time spending and who don't really care about others or some future creaking point - for they have the houses and easy money from the good times, together with all the pleasures from it during the boom.  Conservatives couldn't compete with it. 

Conservatives take over in the ruin.  Wreckage.  Options limited because of severe malstructured economy.   BTL remains, and a double-down into BTL begins.   In 2015 Conservatives signal HARD NO to 'their' povertylater BTLer core-voters (that letter... Conservative member my whole life ... encouraged my followers to vote same way ------> errr all your BTL main glory days were under Labour !!!!!!!! - how many properties as BTL?  You doubled down under few years of Conservative and laughed at numbskull renter-saver anarchists - now have S24 and more!).  Money and wealth doesn't just come out of nowhere, and keep compounding for 'core-voters'.

And fact is that Labour were in power and loved it.  They get the blame they deserve.   Day 1 with all the Luvvies to party at no.10.  1 0 years of Brown with ever more confident hands and arm power gestures, and 'right thing to do' nonsense.   Loudness.

1997, into 'things can only get better' power, taking an economy the Conservatives had taken hits about for rebalancing after some excess of the 80s which led to HPC 90 - followed by opportunity for some and steady level times -------------- and as spyguy indicates.... 10 years of Labour 'boom' (putting would-be homeowners against ever more IO BTLers) taking the banks/financial system in ruin (in just 10 years!).  

Only followed by 'QE galore' / BTL double down, financial repression (ongoing),  - with many Labour type minds very very creative in rationalising extreme risk and greed etc.  Even now in 2017, on this thread, coming it to tell us that we should be fearful that S24 gets quashed and to worry about a new BTL big bailout - and - if they the BTLers do fall - INNOCENCE and SYMPATHY for all of them.

Tell it to multi-home Blairs.  Of course people "couldn't have known" - nothing in world history to take as bearings... all those previous recessions and corrections and crashes in UK and around the world over 100s of years... no lessons from Brothers Grimm Fisherman & his Wife- or Aesops Greed fables.  No previous crashes from booms, so just boom boom boom it.  Excuses for BTLers who have had fine life of luxury with own home, followed by making claims down the years in open market to acquire 10+ homes, rented out to tenants?   

At least Ken Clarke recently told one of the older BTLers with (10 properties rented out) some hard truths.   And really.... the 10 home BTLers an innocent who was just following what he thought was best with all those homes?  Had previously been a GP - we all have to take our bearings about the world and decide what we would do to other people if we had power.   How we treat other people.   KC ... smile at that BTLers predicament, the S24 pincer, can't carry over losses from years way back, and tells them property investors need to get wiped out by a big HPC.  

 

19 hours ago, iamnumerate said:

Well I meant amazing if you think what the Labour party was set up for.  It is bit like if in 30 years time UKIP were campaigning for us to rejoining the EU.

I get you. Yes.  So far gone.  Labour 1997 - 2007 BOOM BOOM BOOM - to BUST.  Overseeing BTL madness, HPI Forever.   Then they began to take credit for saving the world.  0.5% QE galore... 4 ACES pulled from under the table against the young and renter-savers.   'It started in America'.  Yvette Cooper (2008)... "I think it was right people want to be homeowners and should be able to be homeowners and you shouldn't be putting them down for becoming homeowners"  (to Andrew Neil re out mad levels of debt) --- yeah outbidding to extreme is just purest innocence.  

Labour were major active participants in this 'worldwide in scope' -  including with attracting financial participants to London with weaker regulation, and it was very difficult for other political parties to push back against their view, and their actions.  Some senior people believe the US was goaded into slacker financial regulation because of the UK (meaning Labour).

Edited January 26, 2017 by Venger

[Venger]

13 minutes ago, Venger said:

 Labour were major active participants in this 'worldwide in scope' -  including with attracting financial participants to London with weaker regulation, and it was very difficult for other political parties to push back against their view, and their actions.   Some senior people believe the US was goaded into slacker financial regulation because of the UK (meaning Labour).

 

Labour.  They can take the blame they deserve.  BTL and HPI madness belongs to them - taking the UK banks to ruin.   Leaving anyone coming in with very difficult decisions.

Quote

2011

It is rare for a minister of one country to attack alleged government policy in another country, even when the government of the country on the receiving end of the criticism has changed.

So these remarks by Tim Geithner, US Treasury Secretary, are of more than passing interest:

"The United Kingdom's experiment in a strategy of 'light touch' regulation to attract business away from New York and Frankfurt ended tragically."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13678448

 

Edited January 26, 2017 by Venger

[spyguy]

10 minutes ago, Venger said:

 

 

I get you. Yes.  So far gone.  Labour 1997 - 2007 BOOM BOOM BOOM - to BUST.  Overseeing BTL madness, HPI Forever.   Then they began to take credit for saving the world.  0.5% QE galore... 4 ACES pulled from under the table against the young and renter-savers.   'It started in America'.  Yvette Cooper (2008)... "I think it was right people want to be homeowners and should be able to be homeowners and you shouldn't be putting them down for becoming homeowners"  (to Andrew Neil re out mad levels of debt) --- yeah outbidding to extreme is just purest innocence.  

Labour were major active participants in this 'worldwide in scope' -  including with attracting financial participants to London with weaker regulation, and it was very difficult for other political parties to push back against their view, and their actions.  Some senior people believe the US was goaded into slacker financial regulation because of the UK (meaning Labour).

As in most thread -A declaration -Im from a Blue collar Labour background.

Brown carried on Ken Clarke's spending throttle till ~2000. By the late 90s, the UK national debt was low, te government was running surplus. Houses priceslow, economy doing really well.

I was quite impressed.

The operation VoteForBrown start in 2001ish. The one eyed scots tnuc than went and spent about 20 years money in about 5 years. in less than 10 years Brown turned the UK into a cabbage state - 50% of families  people out of jobs and onto welfare, turned the government finances into a fly blown African 3rd world, turned 200 years of banking capital into a dust.

 

[spyguy]

6 minutes ago, Venger said:

 

Labour.  They can take the blame they deserve.  BTL and HPI madness belongs to them - taking the UK banks to ruin.   Leaving anyone coming in with very difficult decisions.

 

Yeah and look what 'jewels' we lured here ....

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2009/06/the-man-who-crashed-the-world

Not quite sure how you can manage to be more arrogant ,stupid and more financially inept than Brown but I think  Cassano achieve it

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2009/06/the-man-who-crashed-the-world

Link to full article does not work. Hopefully a google will find it.

[Venger]

40 minutes ago, spyguy said:

As in most thread -A declaration -Im from a Blue collar Labour background.

Brown carried on Ken Clarke's spending throttle till ~2000. By the late 90s, the UK national debt was low, te government was running surplus. Houses priceslow, economy doing really well.

I was quite impressed.

The operation VoteForBrown start in 2001ish. The one eyed scots tnuc than went and spent about 20 years money in about 5 years. in less than 10 years Brown turned the UK into a cabbage state - 50% of families  people out of jobs and onto welfare, turned the government finances into a fly blown African 3rd world, turned 200 years of banking capital into a dust.

There are good Labour minded people!  

There are greedy and bad Labour minded people.  

Just the same within the Conservatives - (I don't fully know where I am politically myself these days but getting more hope with Conservatives, despite the BTLers double-down pain years, because of S24 and other measures) - but the Conservatives were out of power 1997-2007, and the Conservative tendency (98-2004) was still with caution and not willing to offer same level of spending good time promises Labour were always doing.  After Howard... well younger Metropolitan Conservatives seen Labour's miracle and never put to the test themselves - also enjoying their miracle... so hard to push back against.

So drowned out by hands-and-arms and big smiling spend spend Gordon & Co Labour.

I can roll with your view of Brown initially carrying on steady in the very early years.  He wasn't as animated in those years.  Holding to a budget (wasn't it in Labour's 1997 election manifesto to do so - to follow same spending plan as Conservatives in their first term?) - although things behind the scenes were already ballooning early on.

Things got so mad within Labour... (I totally agree with you, and you being "honest witness" Labour in your view) big gazumping was early 2000s (I know personally about that), then HPI madness+++++++ , BTLers, the banks also taking their lead from Gordon and Labour (his 3 Tripartite system where no one knew who was really responsible for what - and lack of communication) and the wider coarse worshipping it.  

Complacency.  Money from nowhere.  Spend++++.   Big smiles.  Loud.    And still paying for it now with madness where people feel sorry for ALL those BTLers with claims on multiple houses as innocents!!    Many worth £millions in new worth, and still sympathy and innoncence.   And latest Poverty Later posts I read this morning... human shield tenants (the innocence!).

 

Quote

What is all your studying worth, all your learning, all your
knowledge, if it doesn't lead to wisdom? And what's wisdom but knowing
what is right, and what is the right thing to do?

Some enjoy the "no-one to blame"...  "worldwide in scope" - "Brown was just one actor among many" - but he was a major participant in causing the reality he (and other Labour powers) oversaw, which delivered big winners and big losers - turning banks to ruin in 10 years in mad-mad-mad continuation boom of double down and greed.  Basics totally overlooked.  Excuses galore.   BTLers as our housing masters!  WTH?

William Hague (Year 2000)

Quote

William Hague
They clearly can be delivered. When we say that we will run Whitehall and the whole machinery of government for £1.8bn less - we were doing it three years ago - you don't have to look into a crystal ball - you can read the book. Things don't change. Are people receiving a better service from Government departments today than three and a half years ago? No of course they're not, but there are thousands of more civil servants and the cost has gone up by nearly £2bn.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...ektrans07.shtml

Howard 2004.

Quote

"We must get a grip on public spending, cut back on waste, reduce regulation and cut taxes."

Mr Howard accused Chancellor Gordon Brown of favouring a European-style economic model of heavy regulation and high taxes rather than what he said was a more flexible and competitive US-style capitalism.

The Conservative leader stopped short of committing himself to specific tax cuts if he comes to power.

But he said Conservative plans to cut regulation and waste and reduce the rate of growth in public spending would "get us to a position where we can actually start to reduce taxes".

http://news.bbc.co.u...ics/3552169.stm

Howard 2005.

Quote

1 October 2005

Departing Tory leader Michael Howard said he believes only an economic slump can return the Conservatives to power.

He told the paper: "When most people are relatively content with their economic lot, it is very hard for an opposition to win elections.

"I don't want the economy to go down the pan - I care about the country and I don't want anybody to go through any economic difficulties.

http://news.bbc.co.u...ics/4299490.stm

 

Edited January 26, 2017 by Venger

[zugzwang]

2 hours ago, Venger said:

There are good Labour minded people!  

There are greedy and bad Labour minded people.  

Just the same within the Conservatives - (I don't fully know where I am politically myself these days but getting more hope with Conservatives, despite the BTLers double-down pain years, because of S24 and other measures) - but the Conservatives were out of power 1997-2007, and the Conservative tendency (98-2004) was still with caution and not willing to offer same level of spending good time promises Labour were always doing.  After Howard... well younger Metropolitan Conservatives seen Labour's miracle and never put to the test themselves - also enjoying their miracle... so hard to push back against.

So drowned out by hands-and-arms and big smiling spend spend Gordon & Co Labour.

I can roll with your view of Brown initially carrying on steady in the very early years.  He wasn't as animated in those years.  Holding to a budget (wasn't it in Labour's 1997 election manifesto to do so - to follow same spending plan as Conservatives in their first term?) - although things behind the scenes were already ballooning early on.

Things got so mad within Labour... (I totally agree with you, and you being "honest witness" Labour in your view) big gazumping was early 2000s (I know personally about that), then HPI madness+++++++ , BTLers, the banks also taking their lead from Gordon and Labour (his 3 Tripartite system where no one knew who was really responsible for what - and lack of communication) and the wider coarse worshipping it.  

Complacency.  Money from nowhere.  Spend++++.   Big smiles.  Loud.    And still paying for it now with madness where people feel sorry for ALL those BTLers with claims on multiple houses as innocents!!    Many worth £millions in new worth, and still sympathy and innoncence.   And latest Poverty Later posts I read this morning... human shield tenants (the innocence!).

 

Some enjoy the "no-one to blame"...  "worldwide in scope" - "Brown was just one actor among many" - but he was a major participant in causing the reality he (and other Labour powers) oversaw, which delivered big winners and big losers - turning banks to ruin in 10 years in mad-mad-mad continuation boom of double down and greed.  Basics totally overlooked.  Excuses galore.   BTLers as our housing masters!  WTH?

William Hague (Year 2000)

http://www.bbc.co.uk...ektrans07.shtml

Howard 2004.

http://news.bbc.co.u...ics/3552169.stm

Howard 2005.

http://news.bbc.co.u...ics/4299490.stm

 

What fantastic nonsense. The idea that Gordon Brown single-handedly turned the world's financial system on its head after the year 2000 is beyond ridiculous.

As for the Tories 'pushing back'?

Who can ever forget George Osborne's tearful panegyric to the Irish housing bubble and European Monetary Union delivered in 2006?

And then there's the recent Tory record on 'balancing' the budget. 

And a rampant echo housing bubble, which frankly speaks for itself.

 

 

 

[spyguy]

No, it really was Gordon Brown and small number of cohorts.

Brown bullied, bribded and blackmailed any senior Labour member out of the anything to do with money.

Brown took a theme - light regulation of finance as the banks will not do anything stupid and turned it into the most hyper in the world. And this in an economy where finance was/is still much higher than similar countries.

The chart on debt shows that UK debt started cranking up as the air that was Brown massive credit bubble deflated, leaving a 12% budget deficit. For that alone Brown and Labour deserve to be hung upside down from a lamppost.

Sure the coalition were a bunch of idiots not slamming shut all the entitlesments and Browns overspend.

tax credits should have been got rid of first. Any idiot can see the damage they do. And stoppedthe number of EUers claiming benefit as the UK was allowed to. Its laughable that Clegg for all his 'Oh dear out of Europe' was party to the policy - tax credits/EU migration - that caused the Brexit vote.

Then work on public spend. The Idiots Cameron + Gidiot just have no sense of business/work that they could not see or admit to how fcked the UK finances were/are.

[tomandlu]

I'm happy to report that, for the first time since I started searching, a four-bed near us has come up for less than £1750/month. If I was willing to settle for a three-bed, then the change from just a few months back is really startling. Until recently, I was looking at what we're paying and what other properties were being marketed for, and was nervously anticipating a rent-rise. Now, not so much.

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/property-57619141.html

[Venger]

 

1 hour ago, zugzwang said:

What fantastic nonsense. The idea that Gordon Brown single-handedly turned the world's financial system on its head after the year 2000 is beyond ridiculous.

As for the Tories 'pushing back'?

Who can ever forget George Osborne's tearful panegyric to the Irish housing bubble and European Monetary Union delivered in 2006?

 

 

And then there's the recent Tory record on 'balancing' the budget.

Labours ruinous policies and HPI galore to the banks all exploding in a short 10 years.  1997-2007.

Spyguy (as an Labour leaning honest witness) and I agree that Labour/Brown had a calmish start.  (Although all led by a big windfall tax on the banks !!  Yeah Labour the anti-banks).

Then things got out of control with HPI and BTL, year after year after year, in a mad mad frenzy.  I was actually there, trying to save toward buying a home, and unwilling to bid against housing financialisation BTLer, and prices shooting up and up.

So those in power are just innocent spectators are they?  Not leading the country?  Not setting policy?   Not claiming they are the best and know what they're doing, and opposition is not worthy of votes.

I suppose Gordon didn't bring in all the FSA split power regime, nor sold off so much of the Gold reserves, in a way which led to prices depressing even further, with little heed for expert consultation ??  Tax credits and other severe economy changing policies?

Really.  You see boom led younger Conservatives, having seen 2 leaders of the opposition worn down with defeats - and hardly listened to in furious bubble-boom years, as having some real part to play in it?   For a few words right before the credit-crunch, and Labour's big ruinous endgame revealed - which turned into a huge bailout because it was so severe.

5 hours ago, Venger said:

unless it was towards 2007... perhaps when the Metropolitan Cons had come into power, also a bit heady from HPI and Labour's miracle.  

 

4 hours ago, Venger said:

but the Conservatives were out of power 1997-2007, and the Conservative tendency (98-2004) was still with caution and not willing to offer same level of spending good time promises Labour were always doing.  After Howard... well younger Metropolitan Conservatives seen Labour's miracle and never put to the test themselves - also enjoying their miracle... so hard to push back against.

and 2005.  

It wore out Hague, and Howard, as leaders of Conservative Opposition.  

Yes, then came the younger Metropolitan Conservatives.... but Cameron and Osborne younger and by that time basically proven there was no arguing with Labour's miracle.  Howard had tried and warned (as he stood down) that it seems only a big painful correction could see Conservatives come to power.

No way Osborne/Cameron (leader of opposition), coming in late... as credit crunch approaching, could take blame in 2006, for all of Labour's policies in POWER, and the effects of it all.   Having seen Labour power on and on, raging HPI/BTL and apparently miracle economy of ever rising prices and more debt and no consequence - and maybe by that time also taken aback by what Labour had seemingly achieved.    They were not equipped and the culture change was so severe into FOREVER HPI GALORE.

10 years to break major parts of the UK financial system, requiring huge bailouts.

 

5 hours ago, Venger said:

Conservatives take over in the ruin.  Wreckage.  Options limited because of severe malstructured economy.

Yes, Conservatives do not look good for continuation policies (and overseeing more BTL) and foreign property investors in recent years (and HTB with closeness to corporates), but their options were limited.   What options did they have?  Could the banks handle HPC back then, or did they have to draw in new greed?   We know banks are better stress tested for HPC now.  Been one of the major stress tests for last few years, although many BTLers ignored everything about that, with over £200 billion of fresh BTL lending since 2010, mostly to those who already have equity in their own high value homes.

NOW S24 and other measures that many double-down BTLers are ASTONISHED about and left them in shock - with some in fear of bankruptcy despite once counting their millions in asset wealth, all the homes.  S24, Universal Credit, CGT pincer.   People who can shoulder a HPC, it seems like to me.  Greed to pay.  Some cold positioning, and hints that Conservatives can tell people they've been too greedy, overriding all their excuses.

Edited January 26, 2017 by Venger

[zugzwang]

3 minutes ago, Venger said:

 

Labours ruinous policies and HPI galore to the banks all exploding in a short 10 years.  1997-2007.

Spyguy (as an Labour leaning honest witness) and I agree that Labour/Brown had a calmish start.  (Although all led by a big windfall tax on the banks !!  Yeah Labour the anti-banks).

Then things got out of control with HPI and BTL, year after year after year, in a mad mad frenzy.  I was actually there, trying to save toward buying a home, and unwilling to bid against housing financialisation BTLer, and prices shooting up and up.

So those in power are just innocent spectators are they?  Not leading the country?  Not setting policy?   Not claiming they are the best and know what they're doing, and opposition is not worthy of votes.

I suppose Gordon didn't bring in all the FSA split power regime, nor sold off so much of the Gold reserves, in a way which led to prices depressing even further, with little heed for expert consultation ??  Tax credits and other severe economy changing policies?

Really.  You see boom led younger Conservatives, having seen 2 leaders of the opposition worn down with defeats - and hardly listened to in furious bubble-boom years, as having some real part to play in it?   For a few words right before the credit-crunch, and Labour's big ruinous endgame revealed - which turned into a huge bailout because it was so severe.

 

and 2005.  

It wore out Hague, and Howard, as leaders of Conservative Opposition.  

Yes, then came the younger Metropolitan Conservatives.... but Cameron and Osborne younger and by that time basically proven there was no arguing with Labour's miracle.  Howard had tried and warned (as he stood down) that it seems only a big painful correction could see Conservatives come to power.

No way Osborne/Cameron (leader of opposition), coming in late... as credit crunch approaching, could take blame in 2006, for all of Labour's policies in POWER, and the effects of it all.   Having seen Labour power on and on, raging HPI/BTL and apparently miracle economy of ever rising prices and more debt and no consequence - and maybe by that time also taken aback by what Labour had seemingly achieved.    They were not equipped and the culture change was so severe into FOREVER HPI GALORE.

10 years to break major parts of the UK financial system, requiring huge bailouts.

 

Yes, Conservatives do not look good for continuation policies (and overseeing more BTL) and foreign property investors in recent years (and HTB with closeness to corporates), but their options were limited. 

NOW S24 and other measures that many double-down BTLers are ASTONISHED about and left them in shock - with some in fear of bankruptcy despite once counting their millions in asset wealth, all the homes.  S24, Universal Credit, CGT pincer.   People who can shoulder a HPC, it seems like to me.  Greed to pay.  Some cold positioning, and hints that Conservatives can tell people they've been too greedy, overriding all their excuses.

We all have our trigger issues, grievances that make us see red. With me it's the banks and the economists. With you it's the BTL parasites.

Spyguy's still got a feather up his can over Gordon Brown. Who am I to say he's wrong? Or that he shouldn't take every opportunity to vent against the criminal injustice that Brown saddled us with. I've been waiting to buy a house for thirteen years because of New Labour's reckless irresponsibility. Brown and Blair deserve their place in the pantheon of shame.

And as suspicious and disdainful as I am about Tory motives and the City of London, I hope you're right about S24.

[Venger]

 

 

On 1/24/2017 at 10:46 AM, mat109 said:

Totally agree. I meant from the perspective of the common BTLr, the property market has very little risk. Their worldview, not mine and one you commonly see on the forums.

Yep. There's a good reason that unsophisticated investors shouldn't touch leverage stocks (myself included). They get burnt. IMO, this is going to happen with leveraged BTL - but in very, very slow motion. If I'd borrowed masses of money to buy BT stocks last night (down 15% this morning), i wouldn't expect any pity or special pleading this morning.

Problem is, there is a political risk that the Government takes pity and decides that these investors should be treated otherwise ('missold' BTL). 

Only thing for it is to moan, moan, moan (with pride). We're getting there.

BTL overlords no longer proudly announce their 'habit' at social events - at least to me, someone under 30. Comments in the Daily Mail are mostly anti-HPI. Forward thinking politicians are falling over themselves to be seen to build (which implicitly means they think house prices are too high, even if the fixes seem ridiculous). Labour are actually talking about it, a change from the Bliar years. 

Quote

This is - although perhaps clumsily put - my point. Go onto any BTL forum and marvel at their inability to string two sentences together or argue with any coherence, or make rational decisions. These aren't the creme of society, they are participants in a get rich quick scheme who lack the skills and empathy to see the danger.

I wouldn't be too troubled. For me, It's an explanation of thier behaviour (poorly informed, greedy, stupid) rather than a justification or a reason to bail them out. I have sympathy for anyone who loses their shirt, even if they deserved it or spent said shirt on a socially damaging bandwagon.

Anyway mat109 got his rise out of me.  <30 posts .... it's 2017, on this thread, on HPC, explaining how he sees quite some risk of big financial bailout coming for the BTLers ahead - but if some do fal -, about his big blanket sympathy for people he doesn't know (or does he)... losing their claims on multiple homes.

It's not just BTL. 

BTL / Housing financialisation - It is not all about intelligence, but how we see the world, and how we view importance of other people in wider society/culture.  

We take our own market choices.  Many chose BTL.   There are many lessons about risk.  When I buy I will be concerned enough about keeping costs of 1 house (maintance), and paying debt down on it.   Others have laid claim to lots of houses, outbidding everyone else in the market because 'they are worth it' above all other people.

And right now the BTLers are reaping the rent.  Many will just see some losses in event of a HPC.  

Which one Mat?  We should be worried about coming bailouts for the BTLers - and if doesn't occur - we need to devote our lives to the BTLers (many on the forums who believe they are the big-I-am to their tenants), who might go on to changed financial circumstances, and horror-of-horror, become renters like many on HPC have been for years?   Might as well just devote ourselves to the BTLers and be happy renters forever.  ForeverHPI!  Yes?  A BTLers pension with little security of tenure.

There are many intelligent BTLers.  Accountants, GPs.  

Quote

On 8/5/2014 at 0:49 PM, 8 year itch said:

For the past 2 years, I have seen people continue to be bailed out for their balls out risk-taking, mocked for my risk aversion to the extent that I was openly mocked by BTLers as a poor man from a poor family* who do not understand what it takes to become rich (and by 'what it takes to become rich' they meant buy as much property as highly leveraged as you can), seen myself priced out of a market where houses are bought for cash and then rented out the day after completion at sub 3.5% yields (these are 3% stamp duty properties too), seen people pay more in stamp duty than I paid in rent for 3 years who are now sitting on £150k+ of 'profit' and lastly have a landlord who despite buying the house I live in for under £60,000 in the late 90s contacts me to say that he needs to show a rental income of £800+pm (way above what I'm paying) so that he can re-mortgage onto a better deal. You do the math, I'd guess current value is around £240-250k but anything is possible in this market but not all early market entrants are sitting pretty and this sort of BTL activity has pushed up rental prices in the area to upwards of £1000pcm for a small family home and garden.

 

What nice things to expect today from a view of the BTL forums.  How great tenants are?  

Ah immediately to The Innocence and the BTLer types deserving of all the sympathy.   Seem to recall this BTL believes his portfolio to be worth millions.  Landlord to many many tenants.  Projects prices doubling.  

Got a link to it if needing to be proven, from his own website of 2 or so years ago:   45 properties worth nearly £7,000,000 

"Helping the vulnerable."   I have an alternative way of thinking about their way of making money.   Mass Section 21 threats to try and get Gov to turn back on policies they don't like?  (S24 and UC and more)   Round up of tenants in his vehicle, to take them to politicians/council lobby on his behalf? 

Quote

 

25/01/2017

I agree any action would have to be very carefully managed. It could go drastically wrong. Its a PR battle more than anything else. The press support or turn on people on a whim. My actions every day could be seen on one hand as a generous deed in helping the homeless or just a money making scheme targeting the vulnerable. I like making money but i also like helping the vulnerable.

On one 3 bed my mortgage is £200 pcm. I was getting £750 pcm rent but now due to the benefit cap I`m getting £300.

Some would say .Why should the taxpayer pay you £6,600 pa you greedy so so …be happy with £1,200 pa as you know your house will double in value in 15 years or so .

Others would say….. Bless him hes housing the otherwise homeless and by doing so saving the taxpayer from funding a council house and maintaining it… . £6,600 for that therefore is fair recompense

We are a disjointed group. It would take a long time and a great deal of effort to all align ourselves and take joined up action. The Judicial Review boys will no doubt confirm that.

Our image is poor – more akin to bankers than junior doctors . The doctors felt forced into action recently but it was not something they seized on at the first opportunity. They did only when government would not listen

I am not naturally militant but when you see a policy which `steals` £5,400 pa from me without any negotiation or notification and then hits me at the same time with a 5 fold increase in my tax bill due to sec 24 then my horns come out

 

Edited January 26, 2017 by Venger

[Venger]

8 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

We all have our trigger issues, grievances that make us see red. With me it's the banks and the economists. With you it's the BTL parasites.

Spyguy's still got a feather up his can over Gordon Brown. Who am I to say he's wrong? Or that he shouldn't take every opportunity to vent against the criminal injustice that Brown saddled us with. I've been waiting to buy a house for thirteen years because of New Labour's reckless irresponsibility. Brown and Blair deserve their place in the pantheon of shame.

And as suspicious and disdainful as I am about Tory motives and the City of London, I hope you're right about S24.

You're right zugzwang.

Who am I to claim you're wrong either.  

We do have our trigger issues that do exactly as you say.   Spyguy's posts on the subject, over time, have kept it in sharp focus for me as well, for I see it very similarly.

Good way of putting it.   A lot deserve their place for their involvement and actions.  

S24 is a hope for many of us - although many other hpcers do good work to cool me to how long it will take to play out and have any effect... against wider situation.  

Others come here now in 2017 claiming big BTL bailout to come - or if not - it must be BTLers as the victims and must have sympathy. 

At least S24 a shock to the main housing financialisation participants.  Well those who have bothered to find out about it.   SDLT surcharge too... but still BTLers been buying.  

[mat109]

3 minutes ago, Venger said:

Which one Mat?  We should be worried about coming bailouts for the BTLers - and if doesn't occur - we need to devote our lives to the BTLers (many on the forums who believe they are the big-I-am to their tenants), who might go on to changed financial circumstances, and horror-of-horror, become renters like many on HPC have been for years?   Might as well just devote ourselves to the BTLers and be happy renters forever.  ForeverHPI!  Yes?  A BTLers pension with little security of tenure.

I had no intention of provoking you into any sort of reaction and I'm sorry if I've wound you up. It wasn't my intention. I'd stopped posting when you said you didn't want to engage further in a previous post.

Look - I'm all too aware of the young and priced out. I'm young-ish (mid-late twenties) and priced out (London) and paying up the rent as well, as are many of my friends. I had a question asked in parliament by Corbyn in his first question time  after deciding the embark on a letter writing campaign in 2015 over the housing crisis (I'm Matthew) https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/oct/14/pmqs-corbyn-accuses-cameron-limiting-life-chances-children . Shortly afterwards (looks like the day after, in fact - obviously I'd been inspired) I found HPC and have been lurking ever since. Make of it what you will, I'm not hugely pro labour/corbyn either but I had a staunchly Conservative MP at the time who wrote deeply unsatisfactory replies. It frustrates me that so few people my age don't get angrier.

You'll note from my limited posts I take an interest in the tenant - landlord law, because it's the only way I have to improve my situation other than working and saving. I've extracted non-protected deposit compensation - easy to do - and enjoyed making more than one letting agent miserable by complaining loudly and winning each time.

From the sympathy side - yes I'm a snowflake. I think someone in their 60s, 70s, 80s in a shit flat somewhere who can't afford to make more of their sunset years is a shame and that lady who lost her lot in "HPC-lite" and now spends her time bitter and twisted and pursuing restoration is a sad way to end a life. Other than the safety net of the benefits system the Government shouldn't get involved though. Few fear this, because they cannot see the risk (which when obvious they try and avoid - mention stocks etc.).

Had she been better informed (note: not the same as education or intelligence), perhaps she wouldn't have gone all in - alternatives exist - but certain interests (builders, bankers etc.) have contrived to encourage her ilk which hurts everyone else. The BTLrs are unwitting pawns and agents.

Who am I blaming? The groupthink which sees shelter as a one way bet which has become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The longer it all goes on though, the more people in total get hurt - and yes, the madness needs to stop, and almost noone is going to have won out of it.

[spyguy]

1 hour ago, zugzwang said:

We all have our trigger issues, grievances that make us see red. With me it's the banks and the economists. With you it's the BTL parasites.

Spyguy's still got a feather up his can over Gordon Brown. Who am I to say he's wrong? Or that he shouldn't take every opportunity to vent against the criminal injustice that Brown saddled us with. I've been waiting to buy a house for thirteen years because of New Labour's reckless irresponsibility. Brown and Blair deserve their place in the pantheon of shame.

And as suspicious and disdainful as I am about Tory motives and the City of London, I hope you're right about S24.

Ive not got any attached or anyhting to Labour. My Nan was an every mover in the post war Labour movement. She was very much from workers collective side ie. more mutual support than moonbeam Socialist side. Before she died she'd been railing about benefits being non-contribotory and the NHS basically being an inefficient monopoly.

Ive been around (Northern) Labour people and thinking for years. Im not fully bought into it; just there for beer and busty women, or helping my Nan,

Anyhow, back to Brown. Labour were still fighting/worried about militant when John Smith had his Scotmans life expectancy event. They were concentrating too much of a Derek Hatton, what they did not expect was a total fcking lunatic. I used to chat to old Socialists and new progerssives types - I wont say Blairites, as they were not and Blair is useless.

What they got was a weak willed populist (Trump at least has acted on a few of things he said) and a fcking lunatic.

Everything to do with money - spending/benefits/treasury/taxes - was grabbed by Brown. Benefit policy? Brown wanted total control. A tax on something? Brown wanted say so. A school shed to built on Shetlands? Brown wanted control.

I really cannot stress how much control Brown asserted over the party. You either thought he was an unfallible Idol, or you were out, by fair (rarely) or foul (mostly).

Brown wanted everyone dependent on him. On Benefits - gracious to Brown. Working in he city in a bank - gracious to Brown. Any bit of thought or free will was destroyed. Everything.

Brown blew the biggest credit and public spending bubble ever seen in the world.

And it burst.

Labour is likely to be destroyed. Not really because of Corbyn - Corbyn was ignore as he posed no threat to Brown. They decided he was fcking useless. Labour are in trouble as there were only Brown people left. When Milliband lost that was it.

My Nan knew Corbyn for ages ago. Her opinion was: He an idiot and a nasty tnuc. You'll see both those traits if he makes it to the next GE.

 

[mat109]

9 minutes ago, spyguy said:

I really cannot stress how much control Brown asserted over the party. You either thought he was an unfallible Idol, or you were out, by fair (rarely) or foul (mostly).

 

Read "the tragedy of power" - suggests that Tony was terrified of him.

Apparently earlier prime ministers had the same problem, but Tony didn't know enough history or read anything about former prime ministers.

It's a common theme with Tony. Iraq anyone?

[Gush]

38 minutes ago, mat109 said:

Had she been better informed (note: not the same as education or intelligence), perhaps she wouldn't have gone all in - alternatives exist - but certain interests (builders, bankers etc.) have contrived to encourage her ilk which hurts everyone else. The BTLrs are unwitting pawns and agents.

"unwitting pawns and agents":- Preventing a fool from his/her fallacy will only create more fools. You cannot take a loan without hell load of information given before hand by solicitors, if that information is not better enough, getting burnt and loosing the shirt alone will make the information better valuable. 

[Venger]

Thanks mat for the background explanation to your circumstances.

I will click into the link later today.

Looking at the world there are millions of much sadder and deeply unfair things in life, compared to 1 single big (multi-million-pound multi-property) ex-BTL landlady who lost her BTLs and her own £500K home... now in a rental herself.   

Look how the BTLers treat their own - and in many instances, in the few examples where BTLers have failed in recent times, BTLers buying from BTLers at prices that would-be homeowners can't afford.   They don't bail them out with their own savings and hugz and cuddles.

Quote

23 hours ago 

DL.
Buying failed HMO's isnt something we dont enjoy doing, there's nearly always a sob story about how these people have sunk all their savings or pension into the deal, often having also paid for courses too, which led them into the HMO world without really researching whether a HMO is right in their location. I think  because they are fellow investors it perhaps brings it closer to home.

To come on this thread projecting how chunky risk of BTLers set to get a financial bailout, projecting so many of them in general as of lower intelligence (math teachers... there's intelligent people there).   It just is not the truth of things (re BTL) - that so many of the BTLers are not able to think for themselves sufficiently, and that they have 'been taken advantage of'.   That is such a narrow superior patronising view imo, of other human beings.  

And we're all alive with free choice.

You admit snowflake sympathy for BTLers who may lose out financially, and at worst become renters themselves - like that ex-big BTLer perhaps, in her older age.

What way of life is it for those denied of opportunity and to be condemned to insecure tenancies by those BTLers who chose to buy up lots of other houses to extremes, to seek capital gains and rent ??

After 9 years of reading about sympathy for owner and BTL side, and all the excuses for their own actions, in an unregulated lending market - where they usually already own more than one home, and prices here 30% above 2007 old peak.... it gets a bit tiring.   In London and other areas, prices far higher than 2007 peak.

I want those homes sold off to younger people at lower, far more affordable prices.  Yes to S24.

48 minutes ago, mat109 said:

Had she been better informed (note: not the same as education or intelligence), perhaps she wouldn't have gone all in - alternatives exist - but certain interests (builders, bankers etc.) have contrived to encourage her ilk which hurts everyone else. The BTLrs are unwitting pawns and agents.

I like to believe I am informed, but millions of BTLers sat on mad-gainz now, and I am more priced out than ever.  Years of renting, moving, and trying to save against raging HPI++++.    

Do people have to pass some sort of test or interrogation that you set, along with a few other HPCers (including all others who see people as mindless animals - despite believing in ridiculous notions themselves such as flat-earth) in all your superior wisdom of what is best for them, before they are responsible for their own market actions?

 

Quote

 

 On 3/30/2016 at 0:30 PM, Neverwhere said:

The person saying "don't do it" should be the individual considering it, who should be aware that they are fallible and don't always make perfect decisions, and that the amount of money involved is non-trivial and high risk. The only way people can learn these things is by being allowed to wear the consequences of their poor decisions when they make them.

The idea of people as objects with no ability to make choices of their own, of adults who can't be allowed to make their own decisions or take responsibility for their own actions, is dystopian in the extreme. 

How could a society which regarded people in this manner do anything other than move towards a system of rigorous and all-pervading control over the the populace at large in order to counteract our apparent inability to think for ourselves?

 

 

 

No fully functioning human adult is so stupid that they can't learn to practice caution.   I refuse to believe that laying claim to more and more homes, with more and more debt, is not within reason of being seen as greedy and risky - in full knowledge of a housing crisis for younger people.

48 minutes ago, mat109 said:

The longer it all goes on though, the more people in total get hurt - and yes, the madness needs to stop, and almost noone is going to have won out of it.

Some people have not been hurt at all.  Many BTLers sat on fortunes.   The more people?  If more people have to get hurt (the BTLers) to break this situation, that is the way it has to be!

What are you, man or mouse?

Quote

 

anonguest

Posted 05 March 2016 - 05:20 PM

 

Firstly, I believe yes we have made quite a few preparations (financially speaking) to shelter us from a quite a flood - as have a great many.  The fact is that, as history shows those who can see the madness for what it is, and take precautions, tend to survive more than those who do not.  Whereas the financial zombies get completely eradicated.

 

But, as you say, it is indeed well possible that the 'flood' would exceed our expectations and not leave us completely untouched in some form or another (e.g. rising crime rates, etc).  But then again are we not already 'touched', harmed and hard done by this ongoing financial madness?  I would argue we, and our like, have already (unfairly!) suffered.  So IF suffering should come to those who genuinely deserve it? GOOD!  It cannot come too soon.

 

Using the fear tactic that you espouse (i.e. you too will get swept up in the flood) doesn't hold sway with me anymore.

 

What are you? Man or Mouse?

 

It has been said, in many different ways, in respect of personal liberty and freedom that it isn't 'free' - it has to, from time to time, be paid for in toil and blood.  The same such applies to ensuring restoration of financial sanity to the world. IF I have to suffer some (more than already) to ensure a better world for my children and their children than I gladly do so.  What are you prepared to do?!

 

These personal stories of people, in this day and age, having to resort to living in vans utterly disgusts me with the 'system' and TPTB.  Anyone who is not similarly disgusted simply does not grasp the significance.

 

If it doesn't you then I put it to you that you have started to lose some crucial essence of your decency and humanity.

 

It's not about winning but about setting it right.  I'm not as involved as I am with all this for my own sake whatsoever - but because I care about the future and want a much better future, and that requires seeing malinvestment by BTLers purged.

Edited January 26, 2017 by Venger

[Venger]

1 hour ago, spyguy said:

Brown wanted everyone dependent on him. On Benefits - gracious to Brown. Working in he city in a bank - gracious to Brown. Any bit of thought or free will was destroyed. Everything.

Brown blew the biggest credit and public spending bubble ever seen in the world.

And it burst.

 

In 10 mad head BTL IO mortgages greedy, no more boom and bust years, but where he took all the glory, as did all other willing market participants.  

1997-2007.

And then 3 years to 2010 claiming it began in America and that he had been trying to get agreement on much better stanards of financial global systematic safety for years (or words to that effect).

Mortgage Rescues, SMI waiting time cut (why bother with insurance - or be a renter-saver), interest rates slashed.

 

Yes... double-down BTL in recent years.... but hello S24, to many a BTLers astonishment.  No HPC yet, but 'sympathy' for the BTLers... "why want more suffering of people (BTLers), because that means more people suffer"  - what alternative?

[Lavalas]

Henry Pryor makes an appearance on Property Tribes going heavy on HPC. 

http://www.propertytribes.com/evidence-of-property-prices-50-bmv-t-127628213.html

Shame it's not 118 as I'd like to see him run rings around some folk.

[mat109]

35 minutes ago, Lavalas said:

Henry Pryor makes an appearance on Property Tribes going heavy on HPC. 

http://www.propertytribes.com/evidence-of-property-prices-50-bmv-t-127628213.html

Shame it's not 118 as I'd like to see him run rings around some folk.

The whole BMV thing is retarded. If it's BMV then it is the market.